LAX Shooting

[Demosthenes]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jjmacnab/20 ... -shooting/

[The Observer]

The M&P15 (“Military and Police”) semi-automatic tactical rifle falls into the AR-15 class of weapons, which is preferred by Patriots for a number of reasons. Such guns are inexpensive...

I am not sure if the M&P15 or any of the guns in the AR-15 lineup can be considered inexpensive. The M&P15 models typically start off in the $1000 range or and go up from there. There are "cheaper" AR-15 guns, but they start off at the $700 range, again this is not really a an inexpensive semi-automatic rifle, compared to the AK-47s and other similar knock-offs that retail for a much cheaper price.

AK-47s are easy to shoot, are reasonably accurate, and can take a beating in the field with a good chance of remaining operational. The ammo is cheaper than the available types for the AR-15 (.223/5.56mm as well as other variations in other models).

It is true the the M&P15 is a gun that is easily modified or comes with options that are desirable for shooters, such as a collapsible/folding stock. But you can find some of these available in the AK-47 lineup as well.

I am sure that most "paytriots" who opt for the AR-15 look is because of the look of the gun, not the price. It looks militaristic, I am sure for some it imparts the impression that they are US military veterans that satisfies their wannabe urges, Since the AK-47 is associated with communism, that is another reason they shy away from the gun. If they were considering purchasing a gun with logic and not passion, they would realize that they could have several rifles for the price of a M&P15 model.

But since sovruns are not known for thinking through things logically, they will buy a gun that they cannot afford instead of using the money for necessary things such as rent, house or car payments, taxes, driver license fees, car registration fees, etc...

[Burzmali]

Looks like the regular sources are having trouble turning up a digital trail for this nutjob. Anyone want to bet that we finally have an example of a sov nutter that is able to successfully partition his online life?

[JamesVincent]

AK-47s are easy to shoot, are reasonably accurate, and can take a beating in the field with a good chance of remaining operational. The ammo is cheaper than the available types for the AR-15 (.223/5.56mm as well as other variations in other models).

100% agree. If I had my choice of weapons needed to survive I would prefer a Kalashnikov. Stronger ammo, close to as accurate as an AR-15, and cheaper both to buy and resupply ammo. The biggest reasons the military went with the smaller ammo is weight to carry and speed of the full auto. The M16 fires much faster and cycles better under full auto then the AK does. Which, in the civilian world, really means nothing. Remember its predecessor, the M14, was chambered in 7.62 x 51. The price range you quoted is pretty accurate, even at Walmart a Bushmaster runs about $1k or so, dead stock, no frills. To order one through Springfield Armory, like my stepfather did, can run $3k or more. I've seen AR-15 clones chambered in everything from .22LR to .308.

One of the interesting things I've noticed with people who seem fascinated by the whole AR-15 "lifestyle" is that 90% of them have no clue what the AR stands for. I really get a kick out of the ones who say it stands for "Assault Rifle", which it doesn't and which it isn't. Armalite is still in business and makes several different models, one of which is the AR-15. They also make an AR-50, which is an AR-15 clone chambered in .50 BMG, and still make the AR-7 which I always thought was a cool piece, another produced for the military weapon that made it into civilian sales.

Agree also it is for the looks that people like this want an AR, no other reason.

[LPC]

Demo's article is about "the Motive," which is something that is always asked about these kinds of shootings, and which I find increasingly annoying because the question seems so useless.

Let me suggest two possible "motives":

1. Shooter had a bad experience with a TSA employee, who patted the shooter down in a way that the shooter thought was sexual. Shooter comes back in a homophobic rage to kill that TSA employee and all of his gay friends.

2. Shooter has never had any experience with the TSA, but believes airport screenings and searches are the latest in a series of threats to our liberties and must be stopped now. Shooter goes to the airport for the first time in a patriotic rage to kill any and all TSA employees.

After a lengthy and expensive investigation, the authorities conclude that it's #1 and not #2, or vice versa, or it's a little bit of both.

My question is: So what? What are we going to do with the information?

I recognize that "motive" *might* have a role in prosecution and sentencing, because for some reason we've decided to treat people who kill other people differently depending on *why* they killed the other people. But I don't think motive matters in this case, and the question about "motive" always seems to arise whether legally relevant or not.

And I also agree that looking into his background is important to find out if he acted alone or is part of a group of other crazies also planning to kill people, but that's a slightly different question.

Investigations might also be useful if they served a statistical, diagnostic, or preventive purpose. For example, knowing that people who are about to commit these kinds of crimes do certain kinds of things that can be used to pick them out from the rest of society would be nice to know. But I don't see that happening.

Trying to identify the rationale used by an irrational person to do an irrational thing is, in my opinion, a waste of time. I also fear that it is a distraction, and counter-productive, by creating a sense of rationality (and therefore less threatening) about something that should be considered irrational (and threatening), which is the ease with which people can get the weapons best suited for this kind of carnage.

[The Observer]

Demo's article is about "the Motive," which is something that is always asked about these kinds of shootings, and which I find increasingly annoying because the question seems so useless.

I agree that, in considering the whole situation, finding out the motive is going to have to little impact. But because we are human beings and lack omniscience, we are going to try to figure out why it happened at one point or another. Just like we sit here and try to come up with a rationale for why one TP did what they did or said what they said. After the dust settles, it matters little why they did it, it only matters what were the consequences of their actions.

And this points out the irony of the situation: just as it is useless for us to speculate why they did it, TPs engage in the same worthless rationalization of why it didn't matter if they failed. After all, they had "good" reasons/motives for standing up to the law, not paying their obligations, filing gibberish, etc.

We might as well sit in Canute's throne on the beach and issue commands to the tide as to try to stop people asking, "why?"

[The Observer]

Looks like the regular sources are having trouble turning up a digital trail for this nutjob. Anyone want to bet that we finally have an example of a sov nutter that is able to successfully partition his online life?

Or a nutter who didn't have much of a life at all that required him to establish a significant digital presence. Believe it or not, there are quite a few people out there like that.

[JamesVincent]

Demo's article is about "the Motive," which is something that is always asked about these kinds of shootings, and which I find increasingly annoying because the question seems so useless.

I agree that, in considering the whole situation, finding out the motive is going to have to little impact. But because we are human beings and lack omniscience, we are going to try to figure out why it happened at one point or another. Just like we sit here and try to come up with a rationale for why one TP did what they did or said what they said. After the dust settles, it matters little why they did it, it only matters what were the consequences of their actions.

And this points out the irony of the situation: just as it is useless for us to speculate why they did it, TPs engage in the same worthless rationalization of why it didn't matter if they failed. After all, they had "good" reasons/motives for standing up to the law, not paying their obligations, filing gibberish, etc.

We might as well sit in Canute's throne on the beach and issue commands to the tide as to try to stop people asking, "why?"

And, if the person is a bonafide whackjob, we might never understand the reasoning behind it. Like Hinckley shooting Reagan for Jodie Foster, Burkowitz claiming that the dog told him so, etc. Knowing the motive *might* allow us to prepare for the next time, if it was ever applied, things to look for, etc. but it never really is.

[Burzmali]

Looks like the regular sources are having trouble turning up a digital trail for this nutjob. Anyone want to bet that we finally have an example of a sov nutter that is able to successfully partition his online life?

Or a nutter who didn't have much of a life at all that required him to establish a significant digital presence. Believe it or not, there are quite a few people out there like that.

That's the other option, but given his age, the lack of a noticeable online footprint is outside of the norm.

[Demosthenes]

Motive in this case makes a big difference if you work for the TSA.

If this is some guy who was groped by a screener and decided to get revenge, then it's a one off event.

If the TSA is the new IRS -- aka, an enemy of the patriot movement -- then that's a huge deal in terms of protecting TSA agents in the future.

[Demosthenes]

I am not sure if the M&P15 or any of the guns in the AR-15 lineup can be considered inexpensive.

I think gun owners nitpick articles because they can. Such is gun culture.

I also think non-gun owners would find the idea that a person can buy a military style tactical rifle for under $600 pretty damned amazingly cheap. Lots of gun nuts posting online agree.

[Kestrel]

Looks like the regular sources are having trouble turning up a digital trail for this nutjob. Anyone want to bet that we finally have an example of a sov nutter that is able to successfully partition his online life?

Or a nutter who didn't have much of a life at all that required him to establish a significant digital presence. Believe it or not, there are quite a few people out there like that.

I would not be at all surprised at what the Powers That Be discover when they finish disassembling whatever digital media hardware he was using. He got the sov'run nutjob manifestos somewhere, and it probably wasn't from a flyer tacked to a utility pole.

[Demosthenes]

I agree. I think his computer (and perhaps his FPS game profile) will yield fruit.

His manifesto was pretty clear, though. He told cops who he was targeting, why, and what he hoped to accomplish. The only thing left to discern is the inciting event that sent him into that world.

I wrote the Forbes piece because DC politicians have tried to dismiss his acts as driven by nothing more than insanity. They are desperately trying to paint this as anything other than an act of terrorism.

[The Observer]

I think gun owners nitpick articles because they can. Such is gun culture.

I am sorry that you think contradicting an presumption with facts is "nitpicking." I cited a number of reasons, prices and explanations to show what you were claiming is not correct. Instead of providing facts or evidence to disprove what I have said, you have resorted to labeling it as "nitpicking." In fact, by labeling it "nitpicking", you are also agreeing that the price of the gun is irrelevant to the rest of the story, so why mention it?

I also think non-gun owners would find the idea that a person can buy a military style tactical rifle for under $600 pretty damned amazingly cheap. Lots of gun nuts posting online agree.

I think that any one not familiar with a particular product may hold a wrong presumption about that product and may accept as fact what any other person may wish to tell them about that product. It doesn't mean it is correct or an objective observation. And somehow using the term "gun nuts" doesn't instill confidence in me about their objectivity about how "inexpensive" a gun is. I would rather rely on the facts than an on-line opinion from a "gun nut."

The $600 price range and below belongs to the AK-47 knockoffs out there on the gun market. And a number of those go for under $500, such as the SKS. Put a little time in researching this on the Internet and you can find these below $400. Again, that is a cheaper price than what M&P15s go for. That is just fact. Not gun culture.

And that goes a long way in terms of explaining why a person like the LAX shooter was nuts and not thinking with his head. That and the urge to own a "military-type" gun shows where his head was.

I would not be at all surprised at what the Powers That Be discover when they finish disassembling whatever digital media hardware he was using. He got the sov'run nutjob manifestos somewhere, and it probably wasn't from a flyer tacked to a utility pole.

Yes, but it was hidden, not plainly visible or otherwise noticed. Maybe someday NSA will find a copy of it stashed in their databases. No one saw this guy coming nor was there anyway to predict what he was going to do. By the time the police was notified by the family that they feared he would harm himself, it was too late.

And I think this alludes to the annoyance that Dan was referring to earlier. Trying to find the motivation for what these guys do only shows that they are unpredictable, imbalanced, and impulsive. If and when they make a threat, it is vague and imprecise. They may be on a long boil for months or years after they feel that they have been injured or otherwise harmed. They tend to be reclusive, secretive and introverts. They go out of their way to not be noticed, they tend to be lone wolves. Society inadvertently assists them by ignoring them or only being too happy to shove them out of their way ( and reinforcing the hatred they nurse).

As such, they pretty much fall off the radar. We are not going to spot these guys, and even if we have strong suspicions about their actions, we will not monitor them long enough to stop them. Why? Because there are simply too many other active criminals out there that affect society on a continuous basis. And society demands that the government deal with visible crime immediately. So that is where the focus goes, because frankly there is an efficient payoff that makes it easy for government to show it is doing its job.

I wrote the Forbes piece because DC politicians have tried to dismiss his acts as driven by nothing more than insanity. They are desperately trying to paint this as anything other than an act of terrorism.

It was certainly terrorism, but it is a single act. There was no conspiracy, no plot, and this is not going to continue on a regular or semi-regular basis. And for the reasons listed above, the DC politicians are not going to do anything about it. Stack's plane crash into the IRS building in Austin was just another one of those one-off events that law enforcement was unable to do anything about. Understanding why he did it is not going to change the dynamics of this situation to prevent the next time a similar event from happening.

The best thing that can happen is spreading the word about movements such as the sovruns so that law enforcement can recognize and be aware of who they are dealing with. An example would have the been the police officers killed in the Kane incident. If they had known enough about the mentality and fanaticism of this movement, perhaps they would have been more alert to what could happen and kept Kane and the kid under close observation once they recognized the warning signs that Kane was giving off in explaining why he didn't need a driver's license or registration.

[grixit]

I think incidents like these are what the original promoters of "leaderless resistance" had in mind, except that there were supposed to be a lot more of them.

[Demosthenes]

I think incidents like these are what the original promoters of "leaderless resistance" had in mind, except that there were supposed to be a lot more of them.

This.

[Demosthenes]

I am sorry that you think contradicting an presumption with facts is "nitpicking." I cited a number of reasons, prices and explanations to show what you were claiming is not correct. Instead of providing facts or evidence to disprove what I have said, you have resorted to labeling it as "nitpicking." In fact, by labeling it "nitpicking", you are also agreeing that the price of the gun is irrelevant to the rest of the story, so why mention it?

Oh good grief. Nowhere in the story did I ever say that the AR15 is the most inexpensive gun to purchase. I said that patriots like them because they are a nice combination of "inexpensive, easy to shoot, accurate, customizable, and for a 10-year period starting in 1994, this type of rifle was banned by federal law, which gives the weapon a certain prestige among Patriot groups."

The $600 price range and below belongs to the AK-47 knockoffs out there on the gun market. And a number of those go for under $500, such as the SKS. Put a little time in researching this on the Internet and you can find these below $400. Again, that is a cheaper price than what M&P15s go for. That is just fact. Not gun culture.

The advertised prices for a M&P15 range from under $400 for the 22 model to $630 for a Sport model.

http://www.slickguns.com/product/sampw- ... rrel-44999

http://www.gunsinternational.com/Smith- ... =100369784

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/prod ... s_id/71971

Trying to find the motivation for what these guys do only shows that they are unpredictable, imbalanced, and impulsive.

Except this shooter was mentally fit according to his parents and roommates, and had planned this shooting out carefully. To get the rifle near the security area, he constructed a suitcase/backpack combination where he cut a hole in the top of a wheeled carry-on, put the gun inside, and the cut a hole out of the bottom of the backpack and placed it on top. When the time was right, all he had to do was lift the backpack up, grab the gun, and fire. He wrote a manifesto, put it where it would be found, and sent goodbye messages to his family in preparation for his suicide by cop.

[notorial dissent]

I really do think this guy was a whackjob, but a sane whackjob, in that he wasn't deranged, or psychotic, on medication, or anything else, he knew what he was doing, why he was doing it, and planned it out fairly meticulously from the sounds of it. He was a whackjob in that his ideals, beliefs, and motivations are so far removed from those of the rest of us(I hope), but he was soley responsible for what he planned and did, and had full cognizance of what he was doing and what his intentions were. He was apparently someone who had a lot of anger, frustration, and/or resentment that had built up over time, and he knew exactly what he was doing. He set out to kill a TSA agent(s), for whatever reason, and did what he set out to do. That he also intended to die in the process as a martyr to his cause, and he nearly accomplished that, is also quite evident. This WAS NOT some random deranged kook going out on a whim to shoot people, this was a cold blooded(well relatively), calculated act of terror. It just didn't happen to be consorted act of terror, or at least not that we know, but it was an intentional act of terror to well terrorize the TSA in particular, and the law enforcement community in general.

[fortinbras]

It now appear the NJ mall gunman is dead, apparently self-inflicted.

Somehow, after shootings of this kind, the people for gun legislation warm up - notwithstanding the specific details of the particular event - and the NRA crowd deliberately picks at the specific details to show that the gunman somehow got his guns in a way that would have not have been prevented by the proposed gun control legislation.

True that shooter XYZ got his gun in a way that would still be possible if the proposed law was passed, but ... one consideration is that while even the most conscientious, careful, and clear thinking gun owner gets old and dies, the guns in his attic stay on for the heirs or whoever offers them cash, no matter how demented or ill-intentioned.

[JamesVincent]

One question. IIRC TSA carried tazers at one point. Is this not true anymore? I have seen several articles since the incident demanding TSA be allowed to be armed, again, I was under the impression that certain ones of them are armed. Going to BWI for the Welcome Home events I saw several TSA agents and/ or airport security armed with semi-auto pistols and saw at least one at one point with a M-16 or AR-15, wasn't paying close enough attention to tell which.